• orbit@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Very good point - I think however it’s worth noting the lack of the NSDA’s addressing of the judges biases and the high levels of debate within that organization the specific people oversee.

    Regardless, and to the authors point, if an alternative org is provided that people prefer, it will gain popularity.

    • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Very good point - I think however it’s worth noting the lack of the NSDA’s addressing of the judges biases and the high levels of debate within that organization the specific people oversee.

      to be honest though i’m not really sure how you can address human bias here, and i’m confident this was also a problem before people started complaining about wokeness like they are here. obviously in an ideal world you would have a system that can impartially adjudicate these things–but these debates are often on very real subjects that impact real people. (in a lot of cases, i’d argue there is even a correct answer to most of these debates that inevitably looms over them.) i suspect the easier route is to just bake in the reality that people will have biases and that’s a part of convincing them in the debate process.